'A generation of Muslims not able to go to university?' blog discussion

Fire_Fox

dktreesea wrote: »

Whatever happened to "there, but for the Grace of God, go I" when seeing someone who appears to be in a more unfortunate position than oneself, the "drunken yobbo" to coin your phrase? "Chav"and "yob" are both derogatory terms than no one deserves thrown at them. And since when was it okay to call a disadvantaged group "the layabout underclass"? If there is justice, God willing one day you will walk thier road! Your justification of prhrases like that on the grounds some people deserve them is a poor reflection on you as a human being.

Yes, I've mixed with a fair few people from a particular minority and listened in horror as they roamed the streets dissing the local people, with comments like we look and dress like the "dregs of humanity", how we have no self respect because we dress down rather than up when we go on the streets, unlike them. How their "home" societies (second generation Brits, mind you) are so much better than here, how their children would never behave like the local white population behave. Oh my soul, some people from ethnic minorities could teach us all a bit about the art of whinging. Should I respect men who spend half an hour in front of the mirror doing their hair before they go out on the street? What's so great about strutting around like a peacock whilst shortening your life chain smoking?

Yes, we should welcome everybody, - how very PC. It seems to me the native people are expected to accommodate and integrate with all newcomers, while some of those same newcomers look down their noses at everything "British", people and culture wise.

My phraseology is clear and I stand by it, try reading what I post instead of what you erroneously assume I mean. As I said
"I look down on those of them who are professional benefits claimants, those who have little regard for the law or local residents, those who have no intention of contributing to society but have an entitlement mentality ... All people on a very low income or even with poor education are not drunken chavs, nor are all people reliant on benefits lazy or scroungers by any stretch. That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the many genuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens."

Yobs and drunken chavs are that way by action more than circumstance and certainly not simply denoted by appearance as your supposed comparisons are, ditto the layabout underclass, both subsections of society who choose to behave as they do.

You know little of my circumstances past or present, foolish to assume. You are not coining MY phrases, Waqasahmed referred to chavs and yobbish back in posts 168 and 173 and 178. Again the way I read it he was referring to deed over appearance or ethnicity
"And do you really think that people drinking, urinating in the streets at 12pm, being yobbish is generally British behavior?"

"When you get abused by chavs on the street - white, black or whatever, I think it's natural to think that you're better than they are..."

"If it makes you feel any better, I know some Pakistani chavs as well... And I'd happily be alienated when they spout abuse at me, for nothing other than being different..."

sharnad

dktreesea wrote: »

Whatever happened to "there, but for the Grace of God, go I" when seeing someone who appears to be in a more unfortunate position than oneself, the "drunken yobbo" to coin your phrase? "Chav"and "yob" are both derogatory terms than no one deserves thrown at them. And since when was it okay to call a disadvantaged group "the layabout underclass"? If there is justice, God willing one day you will walk thier road! Your justification of prhrases like that on the grounds some people deserve them is a poor reflection on you as a human being.

Yes, I've mixed with a fair few people from a particular minority and listened in horror as they roamed the streets dissing the local people, with comments like we look and dress like the "dregs of humanity", how we have no self respect because we dress down rather than up when we go on the streets, unlike them. How their "home" societies (second generation Brits, mind you) are so much better than here, how their children would never behave like the local white population behave. Oh my soul, some people from ethnic minorities could teach us all a bit about the art of whinging. Should I respect men who spend half an hour in front of the mirror doing their hair before they go out on the street? What's so great about strutting around like a peacock whilst shortening your life chain smoking?

Yes, we should welcome everybody, - how very PC. It seems to me the native people are expected to accommodate and integrate with all newcomers, while some of those same newcomers look down their noses at everything "British", people and culture wise.

yes people from abroad can be shocked and show us up with their better behaviour. Just because someone vists england doesnt mean they should pretend to enjoy seeing a bunch of peed slobs vomiting in the streets

dktreesea

sharnad wrote: »

yes people from abroad can be shocked and show us up with their better behaviour. Just because someone vists england doesnt mean they should pretend to enjoy seeing a bunch of peed slobs vomiting in the streets

That's a bit like saying just because someone visits India doesn't mean they should pretend to enjoy seeing thousands of people living next to open sewers and accepting the presence of large rats in their homes.

I agree, people being drunk and urinating and vomiting in our streets isn't a pleasant sight. We're all used to living in a fairly harsh/stark, hard to survive society, where the pressures of life can get to the people sufficiently for them to turn to alcohol as a way of coping. The rest of the world seems to arrive expecting the streets of London to be paved with gold, set in a "green and pleasant land".

It doesn't follow though, that someone seeing those sights for the first time has the right to turn up their noses and make derogatory comments about the local people.

I came back to Britain after a long time away and was shocked to see, in the area where I grew up, (North West London) how immigrants lived, in back garden sheds, five or six men to a room, urinating into the back street gutters because they had no access to toilets. I went to walk past a man coughing in the alleyway, and was told by my family member to not breathe and avert my face while we passed. He told me he had noticed the blood, so suspected TB. I saw emaciated people that day, adult men that looked like they were descending into skin and bones. My family told me they were probably illegal immigrants, maybe failed asylum seekers or overstayers.

There's plenty not to be proud of in today's Britain, but it doesn't mean we should look down upon the people who are suffering, including the drunks on our streets in the evenings.

dktreesea

Fire_Fox wrote: »

My phraseology is clear and I stand by it, try reading what I post instead of what you erroneously assume I mean. As I said
"I look down on those of them who are professional benefits claimants, those who have little regard for the law or local residents, those who have no intention of contributing to society but have an entitlement mentality ... All people on a very low income or even with poor education are not drunken chavs, nor are all people reliant on benefits lazy or scroungers by any stretch. That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the many genuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens."

Yobs and drunken chavs are that way by action more than circumstance and certainly not simply denoted by appearance as your supposed comparisons are, ditto the layabout underclass, both subsections of society who choose to behave as they do.

You know little of my circumstances past or present, foolish to assume. You are not coining MY phrases, Waqasahmed referred to chavs and yobbish back in posts 168 and 173 and 178. Again the way I read it he was referring to deed over appearance or ethnicity
"And do you really think that people drinking, urinating in the streets at 12pm, being yobbish is generally British behavior?"

"When you get abused by chavs on the street - white, black or whatever, I think it's natural to think that you're better than they are..."

"If it makes you feel any better, I know some Pakistani chavs as well... And I'd happily be alienated when they spout abuse at me, for nothing other than being different..."

Ther would, imho, be a group of quite respectable, maybe even middle class, working people who get benefits who probably do also fit the category of "professional benefits claimants", people who choose to arrange their working lives in such a way as to maximise the help they can get from other taxpayers. I've met a fair few self employed people who would fit that category. Plus people who work part time so they have more time for their children, able to pay their rent and for their children due to generous contributions from other taxpayers. It's possible to be outwardly respectable, law abiding, but somewhat morally bankrupt all at the same time.

I stand by what I have said in earlier posts. Just because someone has a hard life and drinks to the point where they are drunk/sick/a public nuisance on the street doesn't justify other people using derogatory terms like yob and chav to describe them. Even people with an entitlement mentality are just trying to make the best deal of a bad hand, for the most part. The only ones of that particular group I object to are those who could work more, who could take on more of supporting the burden of their own lives upon themselves, but choose not to.

Fire_Fox

dktreesea wrote: »

would, imho, be a group of quite respectable, maybe even middle class, working people who get benefits who probably do also fit the category of "professional benefits claimants", people who choose to arrange their working lives in such a way as to maximise the help they can get from other taxpayers. I've met a fair few self employed people who would fit that category. Plus people who work part time so they have more time for their children, able to pay their rent and for their children due to generous contributions from other taxpayers. It's possible to be outwardly respectable, law abiding, but somewhat morally bankrupt all at the same time.

How dare you tell me what I mean by my own phraseology, in the same sentence as using the word humble! :rotfl: I have been clear on MY definition and even emboldened for anything who is being deliberately obtuse. There are FOUR parts, how exactly do you manage in your twisted brain to make respectable working people fit it?

"I look down on those of them who are professional benefits claimants, those who have little regard for the law or local residents, those who have no intention of contributing to society but have an entitlement mentality ..."

dktreesea wrote: »

I stand by what I have said in earlier posts. Just because someone has a hard life and drinks to the point where they are drunk/sick/a public nuisance on the street doesn't justify other people using derogatory terms like yob and chav to describe them. Even people with an entitlement mentality are just trying to make the best deal of a bad hand, for the most part.

Middle class hand wringing. How dare you tell me what kind of life the drunken chavs and yobs I am referring to have had! Get a grip, you can't see how of my eyes, you can't hear out of my ears, you don't work in my job. I can tell the difference between a vulnerable everyday alcoholic and weekend drunken chavs (for a start the alcoholics are far more law abiding and considerate of residents). I consider an addict genuinely vulnerable and genuinely unable to support themselves, why don't you?

"All people on a very low income or even with poor education are not drunken chavs, nor are all people reliant on benefits lazy or scroungers by any stretch. That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the many genuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens.""

dktreesea wrote: »

The only ones of that particular group I object to are those who could work more, who could take on more of supporting the burden of their own lives upon themselves, but choose not to.

Did you even bother to read my posts before throwing your toys out of the pram, over and over again? :rotfl:

Your definition if drunken chavs and yobs is obviously completely different to mine, interestingly yours seems to be much larger. I am not lumping layabout in with vulnerable, I define drunken chavs and yobs primarily by BEHAVIOUR, why are you defining by appearance or class or income? That absolutely is prejudiced.

"All people on a very low income or even with poor education are not drunken chavs, nor are all people reliant on benefits lazy or scroungers by any stretch. That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the many genuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens."

dktreesea

Fire_Fox wrote: »

......"I look down on those of them..."

.....
How dare you tell me what kind of life the drunken chavs and yobs I am referring to have had!.....

That is why words such as chavs and yobs and ASBOs exist, the PC terms don't distinguish between the layabout underclass and the manygenuinely vulnerable, genuinely unable to support themselves, law abiding citizens."

And what gives you the right to look down on anyone, much less label anyone as a drunken chav or yob, or, worse, the "layabout underclass"? You're too patronising for words.

Fire_Fox

dktreesea wrote: »

And what gives you the right to look down on anyone, much less label anyone as a drunken chav or yob, or, worse, the "layabout underclass"? You're too patronising for words.

"The only ones of that particular group I object to are those who could work more, who could take on more of supporting the burden of their own lives upon themselves, but choose not to."

"I'm sick of political correctness when it comes to minorities."
Does that only apply to ethnic minorities? You seem to be rather partial to political correctness when it comes to drunken chavs, yobs and layabouts.

And patronising? How about
"That's exactly the kind of "engagement" I would expect from immigrants and their families who don't feel any connection with the land."

"If you mixed with more local people, maybe you would know people who pray in sweat lodges the traditional way (i.e. traditional to our ancestors, not just to the native Americans), go to the local festivals and participate in mass rituals like the gatherings at places like Stonehenge and Penzance."

sharnad

dktreesea wrote: »

That's a bit like saying just because someone visits India doesn't mean they should pretend to enjoy seeing thousands of people living next to open sewers and accepting the presence of large rats in their homes.

I agree, people being drunk and urinating and vomiting in our streets isn't a pleasant sight. We're all used to living in a fairly harsh/stark, hard to survive society, where the pressures of life can get to the people sufficiently for them to turn to alcohol as a way of coping. The rest of the world seems to arrive expecting the streets of London to be paved with gold, set in a "green and pleasant land".

It doesn't follow though, that someone seeing those sights for the first time has the right to turn up their noses and make derogatory comments about the local people.

I came back to Britain after a long time away and was shocked to see, in the area where I grew up, (North West London) how immigrants lived, in back garden sheds, five or six men to a room, urinating into the back street gutters because they had no access to toilets. I went to walk past a man coughing in the alleyway, and was told by my family member to not breathe and avert my face while we passed. He told me he had noticed the blood, so suspected TB. I saw emaciated people that day, adult men that looked like they were descending into skin and bones. My family told me they were probably illegal immigrants, maybe failed asylum seekers or overstayers.

There's plenty not to be proud of in today's Britain, but it doesn't mean we should look down upon the people who are suffering, including the drunks on our streets in the evenings.

so your saying people shouldnt enjoy seeing our behaviour but they shouldnt feel free to comment on it .

i dont see why people shouldnt comment on drunks

dktreesea

sharnad wrote: »

so your saying people shouldnt enjoy seeing our behaviour but they shouldnt feel free to comment on it .

i dont see why people shouldnt comment on drunks

Just because people may appear drunk to you doesn't mean they are. Maybe they have had an accident. Maybe they are injured.

I hear people sometimes on the bus, talking about some other poor soul who has just got on the bus and who is a bit worse for wear. People say horrible things, just such nasty things. Sometimes directly to the person. Calling someone "chav" or "yob" is in the same category. I always hope one day that man or woman's fate is theirs.

adouglasmhor

dktreesea wrote: »

Just because people may appear drunk to you doesn't mean they are. Maybe they have had an accident. Maybe they are injured.

I hear people sometimes on the bus, talking about some other poor soul who has just got on the bus and who is a bit worse for wear. People say horrible things, just such nasty things. Sometimes directly to the person. Calling someone "chav" or "yob" is in the same category. I always hope one day that man or woman's fate is theirs.

My father collapsed outside his work while waiting for a bus, women talked over him saying vile things like “look at the state of that”, "that's terrible that man being in that state and he's well dressed" etc. and got on the bus and left him lying in the street, only when one of his draughtsmen came out the office and saw him was an ambulance called - I am not sure why he ended up in hospital that day, but drink was not involved. I hope those harpies he heard talking about him as he lay in pain and fear on the pavement have had miserable and sordid lives since then.